Former National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) boss Mxolisi Nxasana has been barred from giving evidence at the state capture commission of inquiry which could implicate axed deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) advocate Nomgcobo Jiba and others. 

This comes after advocate Vuyani Ngalwana, SC, approached the commission shortly after lunch on Wednesday requesting that evidence relating to Jiba be set aside until she is given a chance to reply.

The commission had not yet submmitted notices to the implicated person and intended to do so after the witness gave evidence. 

Ngalwana, however, highlighted that this went against the rules of the commission, which state that the implicated person should be given notice before a witness gives evidence. 

“I would recommend that we allow the witness to testify further but not to give evidence that would implicate Jiba. 

“Any allegation made by a person is taken to be the truth by society before it is even tested. By the time Jiba tests it, it will be too late,” Ngalwana explained. 

The commission, which is dealing with political/external interference at the NPA, was expected to hear a recording, which could implicate Jiba in a plan to dig up dirt against Nxasana that would result in him being ousted from his position as the NDPP. 

Nxasana earlier claimed that Jiba was promised that she would become an NDPP “either in an acting or permanent position”. 

Ngalwana questioned the timing of Nxasana’s evidence as it comes shortly after President Cyril Ramaphosa having relieved Jiba of her duties at the NPA following an inquiry chaired by former Constitutional Court Judge Yvonne Mokgoro, which found that she was not fit to hold office. 

Commission head Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo quickly clarified that Nxasana was on a list of witnesses called to the commission, as per his instruction. 

“The timing was imposed on the witness as per your [Zondo’s] instruction, it was not his choice,” evidence leader advocate Paul Pretorius said. 

As a result, Zondo ruled that in the interest of fairness, Nxasana could only give evidence that related to matters that were already in the public domain or have already been dealt with in a court of law. 

Any evidence that falls out of these parameters will be dealt with at a later stage. 

The inquiry continues.

Read More


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here